Sir,
We thank Mr Chung for his interest in our article on iris reconstruction implants.1 We agree that the types 50 D and 50 E have been incorrectly labelled.
The reason for choosing 50 C implants in case 2 was to provide a ‘good’ pupil size postoperatively for a detailed retinal examination. In our experience, we have found that patients with ocular trauma not only present with anterior segment injuries but also have traumatic retinal dialysis/detachments, which require adequate pupillary aperture size for the retinal surgeon to work with.
Choosing an implant model in eyes with these kinds of extensive injuries is a trade-off between obtaining a reasonable cosmetic appearance and achieving a pupil size, which does not interfere with performing a detailed retinal exam.
References
Srinivasan S, Yuen C, Watts M, Prasad S . Endocapsular iris reconstruction implants for acquired iris defects: a clinical study. Eye 2007; 21: 1109–1113.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Srinivasan, S., Prasad, S. IRIS reconstruction implants. Eye 22, 1204 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2008.14
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2008.14